A not so subtle example of the vast disparities within the same grade~buy the card not the.....grade

ScoobyDoo2

1959

Wow. No difference except centering, corners, focus, and picture quality. And of course , the new grading system .

Willymac

I feel like there are a lot of new graders that don’t realize the differences in quality control and printing tech and thus expect the pack fresh card from 60 or 70 years ago (heck 80’s cards) to have the same sharpness as a 2022 card…the coin market has this figured out, I hope the card graders do soon…

pebarry

Novice collector here. I am very disappointed with PSA and as a caual observer, I do not understand why cards graded by this company are valued so high. The grades are BY FAR the most inconsistent of the major graders. I have refused many purchases because I felt the PSA grade and value was far too high compared to other options. Between the backlog, the inconsistencies, the cost they charge, I do not understand why dealers chose this option as much as they do.

farmboy27

Wasn't this the whole point of the +/half-grade grading system that was introduced years ago where two cards could be in the same overall physical condition but one that has the eye appeal of the second Berra pictured would get the +/.5 bump?

handyman

What about the backs? The centered 4 could have a major issue?

daltex

@ScoobyDoo2 said:

Well, of course this is going to be more common the lower down the grading scale you go. There are an awful lot of reasons a card can be deducted, if you will, to a 4. Many fewer to get to a 9. There is no reason to believe from the above images that the second 4 is higher end than the first one, just that it photographs better. I'm betting that it has pretty serious flaws in hand.

Consider that a card with slight paper loss that has been recolored and a card with the bottom torn off are both (properly) graded A.

1951WheatiesPremium

@ScoobyDoo2

That Yogi is beautiful!!! I’m like you: I love a four that looks like…let’s just say…something higher:

ScoobyDoo2

@1951WheatiesPremium ~ gorgeous.

1951WheatiesPremium

@ScoobyDoo2 said:
@1951WheatiesPremium ~ gorgeous.

Thank you so much.

There are beautiful cards available in every grade. I can’t really afford the really high grade stuff but it doesn’t mean I can’t still amass some beautiful cards. I will say that all 3 cards posted are also, in my estimation, correctly graded. There’s a scratch on the hands and softish corners on the Red Heart, softish corners on the ‘69 White letter and an ink smear along the right side of the 63 and once again those softish corners.

But you’re point is well taken - eye appeal varies greatly within every available grade. Shop accordingly, be patient and when the right card pops up, pounce!

😉

ScoobyDoo2

@1951WheatiesPremium ........ not that you need them.... but all of these gorgeous PSA 4 Mantle's would likely earn an MBA gold designation from Mike Baker.... and with the saturation of the hobby becoming so much greater in the last 2-3 years... the values of appealing examples just shoot higher.... I'd rather have a centered PSA 4 over any run of the mill off centered PSA 6-7's any day of the week.

ScoobyDoo2

My overall perspective was not to harp on PSA grading.... b/c I am sure both cards have valid reasons for the grades they achieved .... just to point out that new collectors might consider appeal over grade.... no rocket science here & and then not to be surprised if/when you see two PSA 4's of the same card several hundred dollars apart in asking price.

DM23HOF

That Yogi 4 centered is gorgeous. The best card is always the prettiest card to the eye of the collector-- assuming the collector in question likes looking at his cards and not the flips

One of my favorite topics. It always triggers me when I see guys, usually on older-skewing hobby chat sites, cherry pick an ugly card's uninspired performance at auction and try to extrapolate from there that the card or cards are going down in price.

Some fun with grades vs eye appeal. Things like image surface blemishes, focus, coloring, and centering have been weighed less than corners for far, far too long in the arbitrarily decided grading criteria. What's nice to see is that these days the market of us collectors really chooses to reward the card over the grade; my favorite example was an exceptional PSA 3 card outselling a subpar PSA 6 version at Heritage about a year ago.

ScoobyDoo2

2 PSA 2.5's. Completely different planets~

My latest get~

1951WheatiesPremium

Always fun to compare within grade to look for an equal…

Not mine…

…mine!

StatsGuy

@ScoobyDoo2 said:
2 PSA 2.5's. Completely different planets~

My latest get~

I'm guessing the bottom one was the one that's more recently graded, whereas the top one was probably graded pre-pandemic.

DM23HOF

AANV

Anytime you're comparing a 10+ year old example against the new grading standard, you're going to have a bad time.

"PsA hAsN't ChAnGeD tHeIr GrAdInG sTaNdArDs"

Yes, we know.

miwlvrn

@StatsGuy said:

@ScoobyDoo2 said:
2 PSA 2.5's. Completely different planets~

My latest get~

I'm guessing the bottom one was the one that's more recently graded, whereas the top one was probably graded pre-pandemic.

And/or, need to see the scans of the back sides too. Surface damage (glue/tape residue or similar concept) could play into a 2.5 grading very heavily, regardless of what the front looks like.

1951WheatiesPremium

In all seriousness, isn’t this exactly what a collector of cards is supposed to do? Be selective and pick the best possible example for what they can afford? Kudos to the guy (or gal) that finds those gems in low grade.

I often try to mention that the technical grades are accurate even with these lookers and I would say most of the time they are; a lower graded card can still look like a gangbuster if the flaws are well hidden.

This card is also correctly graded. I subbed it myself and it received the exact grade I thought it would:

(…and, man, even now I just think that card looks so great in hi-res raw…).

The centering is solid, the print image is solid, three of four corners are solid and the front and back of it is pretty clean, too: small wax streak by number in back and some white in name plate (less than in that scan, some is dust!) and I really don’t think it’s all that easy to spot the main flaw, either: a ripple by the “A and N” in Yankees.

Even less noticeable now in the slab:

…so I think you just buy the best cards you can at prices you can afford and you’ll always be happy with your collection.

GroceryRackPack

@1951WheatiesPremium said:
In all seriousness, isn’t this exactly what a collector of cards is supposed to do? Be selective and pick the best possible example for what they can afford? Kudos to the guy (or gal) that finds those gems in low grade.

I often try to mention that the technical grades are accurate even with these lookers and I would say most of the time they are; a lower graded card can still look like a gangbuster if the flaws are well hidden.

This card is also correctly graded. I subbed it myself and it received the exact grade I thought it would:

(…and, man, even now I just think that card looks so great in hi-res raw…).

The centering is solid, the print image is solid, three of four corners are solid and the front and back of it is pretty clean, too: small wax streak by number in back and some white in name plate (less than in that scan, some is dust!) and I really don’t think it’s all that easy to spot the main flaw, either: a ripple by the “A and N” in Yankees.

Even less noticeable now in the slab:

…so I think you just buy the best cards you can at prices you can afford and you’ll always be happy with your collection.

hey 51Wheaties,
That's a keeper...

Goldenage

BBCE just listed this on eBay. Don’t like that centering.